I could envision an expansionist India in this scenario laying claim to Aden, not only due to the Indian presence there during the British Imperial Period, but also for the purpose of getting a foothold in the oil rich Persian Gulf and projecting naval power through the establishment of a blue water fleet.

I could envision an expansionist India in this scenario laying claim to Aden, not only due to the Indian presence there during the British Imperial Period, but also for the purpose of getting a foothold in the oil rich Persian Gulf and projecting naval power through the establishment of a blue water fleet.

Actually, Mughal rule was only confined to Delhi by the British made their first conquest in India 1757, by that time most of India was conquered by Marathas, a native Hindu dynasty originating from Sahyadri mountains of West Coast of India, in 1758 Marathas conquered Delhi also. Mughals continued to hold the title of "Emperor of India" until 1858 but in really they hardly ruled any territory, after the 1857 uprising the Emperor was exiled to Burma and died there.

For the record, I don't mean territories such as Hyderabad or Kashmir or Junagadh or Goa. Rather, I mean have India expand beyond these territories to territories that it never either controlled or claimed in real life. Also, this expansion needs to happen after India's independence; thus, an independent united India which includes both Pakistan and Bangladesh won't cut it because India would have acquired these territories at the point of independence.

These territories are considered as historical Indian land, so they were assimilated into India. But outside of that there was hardly any scope of Indian expansion. Nepal is a different case, there is an open border treaty with Nepal. Tibet or Burma were never associated to Indian history.

Actually, Mughal rule was only confined to Delhi by the British made their first conquest in India 1757, by that time most of India was conquered by Marathas, a native Hindu dynasty originating from Sahyadri mountains of West Coast of India, in 1758 Marathas conquered Delhi also. Mughals continued to hold the title of "Emperor of India" until 1858 but in really they hardly ruled any territory, after the 1857 uprising the Emperor was exiled to Burma and died there.

These territories are considered as historical Indian land, so they were assimilated into India. But outside of that there was hardly any scope of Indian expansion. Nepal is a different case, there is an open border treaty with Nepal. Tibet or Burma were never associated to Indian history.

Historum

Founded in 2006, Historum is a history forum dedicated to history discussions and historical events. Our community welcomes everyone from around the world to discuss world history, historical periods, and themes in history - military history, archaeology, arts and culture, and history in books and movies.